More Chula Vistans Gather to Fight Lake Pointe Project

Residents angered by the Chula Vista City Council’s vote to change the general plan to accommodate a 284-condo/rental development are gathering forces. At an October 17 meeting, residents opposed to the Lake Pointe development said they are determined to take the issue to the ballot box, if necessary.

Although the city council passed the zone change in September, the developer, Integral Communities, has been working with residents to modify the project.

Opponents of the development are using several strategies. At the October 17 meeting, they invited council member Patricia Aguilar, the only member who voted against the general plan change.

Aguilar pointed out that the general plan is a social pact; it represents a vision for the community. The newly rezoned area was supposed to be retail and commercial, including a “restaurant row.” Now the area is zoned 11.6 residential and .6 commercial.

The group asked Aguilar to provide them with information about the city’s “pay-to-play” ordinances. Opponents are concerned that Integral Communities had undue influence on the rezoning procedure.

Council member Pamela Bensoussan, who is up for reelection in November, received $1900 in campaign contributions from Integral Communities’ principals and wives of principals.

The Lake Pointe opposition group has grown significantly in the past month and established a Facebook page. Group members pledged $100 each toward engaging an attorney to carry their efforts forward.

Resident Barney Reed said in an October 20 interview, “The city is virtually ignoring stakeholders who collectively have almost $2 billion in home investments.”

Reed recently obtained the traffic study used by the developers to motivate the zone change. “I believe the information that was presented to the council was misleading and incomplete. When you look at the average daily trips [traffic] analysis, the council was only presented with the numbers from the low end of the charts…. Developers have not included any traffic flow coming from Otay Lakes Road through Lake Crest Drive. If you use logical reasoning, traffic that crosses the Salt Creek watershed will support a retail/commercial complex, as well as the 7727 resident homes in the two-mile radius.”

Real estate broker Adriana Santisteban said in an October 21 interview that she can’t understand why the city approved the project so fast. Santisteban said the project’s sited 12.2 acres “is the best location in Eastlake; I was looking forward to dining there and looking out over the lake.”

Comments

You reap what you sow. Years ago when I would return home to San Diego I would try and identify where we were at any given moment after we cleared the desert floor. First the Lagunas and eventually east county. Let me tell you that the moment I clear the Lagunas now, all I see is the "Chula Vista sprawl" Now the residents are offended by another lego block addition to the aberration they live in? Should've thought about that sooner. Wait, are the fat cats at the end of the development decrying foul? Hey San Diego, if you haven't been there just take the I-5 to H street and go east. When you get to the end of East H or Proctor Valley road take a look at those lots on the left and tell me what you really think is going on. The wealthy are trying to put a stop to the monster they happily and greedily bought into. Again the 1%ers are trying to get their way. Lets hope they crash and burn. But you know they won't. The seeds of devisiveness continue to flourish.

we need a ballot measure to take power away from developers. SD has no more water for any new development which is why they are forcing every1 to conserve by jacking rates sky high. That way they can keep developing. We need a ballot measure forcing developers to pay more for using water which effects all our rates. Now we subsidize all new development.

also pay attention to the state. they are recreating redevelopment using the term "sustainable communities". this time there is no blight requirement. So they will getting billions in subsidies as soon as Cap and Trade auctions begin. No one ever pays attention to the state and how developers are gaining power. they also keep destroying CEQA which we need to have reinstated and get rid of all the exemptions they have received.

historymatters: You are absolutely right. We are being forced to conserve so that they have more water to supply their new customers. Enough is enough. That land should be utilized as called for in the city's general plan.

The Chula Vista City Plan seems to allow all sorts of alterations, and by the time the citizens know about it, we are told the deed is done...but, if it can be altered in one direction, why can't it be altered again, or returned to the previous plan?

Because that isn't what our civic leaders want?

When you take a look at the bigger picture, what do you see? The Olympic Training Center still has much room for growth, but there isn't corporate, governmental or Olympic support for that at this time.

The area near the Olympic Training Center that has recently been slated for housing, and was slated for commercial development is part of what larger scheme or plan? Just more housing? Why?

If we look down the road a bit--and I am speaking metaphorically--we can surmise that eventually there will be more development at the Olympic Training Center, if only because
"they aren't making any more land". Can we plan something that would be a good fit?

The civic leaders are all up in arms because the strip joint at the Bay Front is not a good fit?
Why aren't they as concerned about the fit here on the other end of town? Probably because the interests of the developers trump the interests of the common citizens.

Should we all jump to the rescue of the civic leaders as they retroactively try to clean up the strip joint mess, even though they go against the majority of the citizens in this neighborhood on the matter of adding more housing units?

Why don't we plan something that is a good fit? Why isn't there a community group with direct input for this kind of thing already? Or if there is such a group, where are they?

A few weeks ago there was an article in the U-T regarding plans for a centralized rehab facility/clinic/exercise facility for all the returning vets, especially those with mobility and traumatic brain injury issues. Personally, I think that if such a facility would be built in the area of the Olympic Training Center, it could be a combination sports medicine/rehab center. Additionally, with the growth in the paralympics, it could be a terrific opportunity to help all those with injuries who are working to make their way to full strength and activity level.

There has also been some talk of a four year college or university. While that could be a good thing, I think we citizens again need more input. What if these higher density units are really slated for student housing? Is there enough honesty around here to really know who is planning what?

So, yes, we in Chula Vista want our land and resources put to the best usage--we don't want to be railroaded whether we live on the east side or the west side. Can we get anyone to listen?